Author Topic: To Catch a Predator - BANG! (Read 2703 times)

Tre · « **on:** February 22, 2007, 08:42:14 AM »

http://video.msn.com/v/us/v.htm?g=B53C4F1C-FCF6-4554-BFE5-656A28ECFF82&t=c150&f=06/64&p=hotvideo_m_edpicks&fg=&GT1=9033

240 is Back · « **Reply #1 on:** February 22, 2007, 11:13:54 AM »

that was crazy. he cybered with someone he thought was a kid, then shot himself as they rushed his house.

56 year old Asst DA.

My guess is that he either did some WORSE shit they were about to find, or that he cared a little too much about his reputation. WHile hideous, he wouldnt have done time, would he?

BayGBM · « **Reply #2 on:** February 22, 2007, 11:53:15 AM »

“… a turn of events they never could have expected”? Wrong. That was very predictable.

These reports may be titillating to middle America, but I find them boring (I don’t watch Dateline) and wonder if they are really doing any good besides generating ratings/$$ for NBC. And let’s face it--$$--is the reason they are airing these reports.

The number of people who are willing to engage in sex with minors (I’ll not call them predators) is disturbingly large and there is no simple solution to the problem . . . as a society we need to become much more sophisticated about every aspect of human sexuality. We also need to take a hard look at the way we cultivate appetites in this population by sexualizing our children. It’s not something most people stop to think about but it’s happening all around us and in plain sight. Certainly, it is all over our media.

This “series” has been on NBC for many months now. When will people stop being shocked and titillated and do something.

Diesel1 · « **Reply #3 on:** February 22, 2007, 11:56:36 AM »

good stuff. that's one less child molester in the world.

i wish british tv would do a similar programme. that would never happen though, the bloody cowards

Pollux · « **Reply #4 on:** February 22, 2007, 12:46:49 PM »

I saw that episode and what the link fails to show is that the DA's sister spoke at a meeting about her brother's death and went on to say that it was the shows fault that he committed suicide.

blinky · « **Reply #5 on:** February 22, 2007, 12:53:26 PM »

i agree that it shouldnt have been a shock to them that someone did this. im surprised that it hasnt happened more .......or sooner.

but i do think it is doing some good. if you watch the show you will see that more of the guys that are trying to meet these kids are very suspicious now and even say they are worried that it might be a sting and mention the dateline show. lots dont even show up now and some wont even enter the house and just drive past.
so i think its helping some

BayGBM · « **Reply #6 on:** February 22, 2007, 01:11:37 PM »

It’s not “helping” at all. Do you really believe NBC is doing this series in order to “help”?

The fact that some of the perpetrators mention the show does not mean it’s stopping them from doing what they want to do. Obviously. People who engage in this sort of behavior are always aware that they may be headed into a sting. That doesn’t stop them. People are aware that unsafe sex may lead to HIV/AIDS but unsafe sex is all too common even among those young enough to know better; everyone under 40 came of age at a time when we knew what risky behavior was.

As I said, there is no easy solution to this problem of sex with minors. It’s a complicated problem that requires far more work than our society is willing to put into it. We certainly need to become a lot more sophisticated when it comes to human sexuality. But how is that ever going to happen in a country where even a rudimentary sex education class causes a controversy among so called “conservatives” that have undue political clout.

Heck, Dick Cheney barely acknowledges the fact that he has a lesbian daughter.

240 is Back · « **Reply #7 on:** February 22, 2007, 01:41:01 PM »

NBC's motive is money. Period.

But if even one pedo has decided not to meet up in real life, then some good was done in the world. Plus, those 50 or 100 guys busted on the show all have a mark on their record now.

Of course NBC isn't the solution, but they have put the fear of God (or of being seen by 30 million viewers being locked up) into people who before, were pretty much operating under the radar. You can believe that many 24 year old guys are now being VERY careful to make sure the girl they're talking to is 17 and not 14.

militarymuscle69 · « **Reply #8 on:** February 22, 2007, 02:00:10 PM »

Quote from: BayGBM on February 22, 2007, 01:11:37 PM

It’s not “helping” at all. Do you really believe NBC is doing this series in order to “help”?

The fact that some of the perpetrators mention the show does not mean it’s stopping them from doing what they want to do. Obviously. People who engage in this sort of behavior are always aware that they may be headed into a sting. That doesn’t stop them. People are aware that unsafe sex may lead to HIV/AIDS but unsafe sex is all too common even among those young enough to know better; everyone under 40 came of age at a time when we knew what risky behavior was.

As I said, there is no easy solution to this problem of sex with minors. It’s a complicated problem that requires far more work than our society is willing to put into it. We certainly need to become a lot more sophisticated when it comes to human sexuality. But how is that ever going to happen in a country where even a rudimentary sex education class causes a controversy among so “conservatives” that have undue political clout.

Heck, Dick Cheney barely acknowledges the fact that he has a lesbian daughter.

Does it make anyone else sick to walk through a mall and see teens in short skirts and low cut tops? People wonder why pervs are attracted to teens? Parents need to lear an old fashioned phrase.... NO

Pollux · « **Reply #9 on:** February 22, 2007, 02:35:23 PM »

Quote from: militarymuscle69 on February 22, 2007, 02:00:10 PM

Does it make anyone else sick to walk through a mall and see teens in short skirts and low cut tops? People wonder why pervs are attracted to teens? Parents need to lear an old fashioned phrase.... NO

That plays a factor because I have seen 13/14 year old girls who look 18-20, but I think it touches base a lot more on the fact that these men KNOW, and ACKNOWLEDGE the fact that these girls are 13/14 and STILL pursue them. That is what's disturbing.

militarymuscle69 · « **Reply #10 on:** February 22, 2007, 02:52:14 PM »

Quote from: Pollux on February 22, 2007, 02:35:23 PM

That plays a factor because I have seen 13/14 year old girls who look 18-20, but I think it touches base a lot more on the fact that these men KNOW, and ACKNOWLEDGE the fact that these girls are 13/14 and STILL pursue them. That is what's disturbing.

Agreed, but the parents shouldn't "advertise" their young kids like they do

BayGBM · « **Reply #11 on:** February 27, 2007, 08:27:00 PM »

I saw a portion of this show again, tonight and something is wrong with these sting operations. Apparently it’s a crime to have erotically charged conversations with minors online… but if you’re chatting online you have no way of knowing how old the person is that you’re talking to.

Anyone who has chatted online for more than 5 minutes knows that people online lie about all kinds of things including their age. Some people say they are younger… some say they are older…

One of the “predators” they carted away didn’t even enter the sting house.

I’m not a fan of predators by any stretch but something is wrong with these sting operations and the laws on which they are based.

gtbro1 · « **Reply #12 on:** February 28, 2007, 12:28:28 AM »

I have posted about this before,but I have a guy that works for me who was busted in one of those internet stings...he actually went to a house to meet a 14 year old girl...or so he thought.

Tre · « **Reply #13 on:** February 28, 2007, 04:02:49 AM »

Quote from: BayGBM on February 22, 2007, 01:11:37 PM

It’s not “helping” at all. Do you really believe NBC is doing this series in order to “help”?

I'm not all that concerned with NBC's motivation.

The show does help, though, in 3 (primary) ways:

1) For parents, it reinforces the reality that a real-life boogeyman does exist in cyberspace and that we must protect our kids from strangers online just as we would from strangers on the street.

2) It shows America that pedophiles (criminals) do come in all shapes and sizes and from all socio-economic levels.

3) It also shows America that pedophiles CANNOT be rehabilitated. They like what they like and many are too weak to do anything about it. The fact that they've had repeat visitors on their broadcasts is unbelievable.

BayGBM · « **Reply #14 on:** February 28, 2007, 07:11:14 AM »

I’ll buy #1. It seems people really are in denial about the potential dangers around them—including online. Numbers 2 and 3 are dubious.

Anyone with a brain knows that criminals (of all kinds) come in all shapes and sizes. Any adult who still doesn’t know that shouldn’t be having children because mentally they themselves are children.

I think calling all of these guys pedophiles is inflammatory but not necessarily accurate when one realizes that the age of consent is arbitrary. 18 year old sex is fine but 17, 16, or 15 is a high crime? I don’t buy that. The enforcement of an arbitrary law does not make the violator a pervert.

Provocative chats online are now a crime if the person you are chatting with (who btw, may be lying) is underage. This does not make sense.

Tre · « **Reply #15 on:** February 28, 2007, 07:48:41 AM »

Quote from: BayGBM on February 28, 2007, 07:11:14 AM

I think calling all of these guys pedophiles is inflammatory but not necessarily accurate when one realizes that the age of consent is arbitrary. 18 year old sex is fine but 17, 16, or 15 is a high crime? I don’t buy that. The enforcement of an arbitrary law does not make the violator a pervert.

Provocative chats online are now a crime if the person you are chatting with (who btw, may be lying) is underage. This does not make sense.

For the most part, I don't believe that one's thoughts or intents should be criminalized, unless there is some action which clearly demonstrates the intent.

In the case of the assistant DA who committed suicide, the crime he was to be charged with was rather sketchy. In his area, it was against the law just to have the conversation, even though he never made any movements toward the sting house. He was in his own home when the local authorities attempted to serve the arrest warrant. The person he was conversing with had lied about her (his?) age - how can that be a crime??

In the cases of those who've traveled to the house to meet with someone they thought was underage, they have demonstrated intent.

BayGBM · « **Reply #16 on:** February 28, 2007, 08:11:46 AM »

Even the charge of intent is problematic. In my younger days I dated a lot. I had my share of one night stands. I brought guys home and went home with guys. Occasionally, I would go home with someone and on the way there or after getting there changed my mind and decided not to go all the way.

Maybe the chemistry changed after the liquor wore off, maybe they didn’t look as attractive outside of bar lighting. The point is, I changed my mind and we didn’t do anything sexual and we were both cool with it.

Talking to someone (anyone) or simply going to their house is not a crime.

And having condoms in your car does not indicate intent. Every other man I know has condoms in his car or in his wallet.

militarymuscle69 · « **Reply #17 on:** February 28, 2007, 10:08:45 AM »

Quote from: BayGBM on February 27, 2007, 08:27:00 PM

I saw a portion of this show again, tonight and something is wrong with these sting operations. Apparently it’s a crime to have erotically charged conversations with minors online… but if you’re chatting online you have no way of knowing how old the person is that you’re talking to.

Anyone who has chatted online for more than 5 minutes knows that people online lie about all kinds of things including their age. Some people say they are younger… some say they are older…

One of the “predators” they carted away didn’t even enter the sting house.

I’m not a fan of predators by any stretch but something is wrong with these sting operations and the laws on which they are based.

You aren't in the wrong if you are told the person is of age. However if the person tells you they are under age and you proposition them for sex online it is a crime even if the act is never carried out. Kind of like picking up a prostitute. If she (or in your case he) gets in your car and you give her $20...busted. They don't wait until you start the act.

BayGBM · « **Reply #18 on:** February 28, 2007, 10:42:11 AM »

I’m still not buying it.

• I drive by homeless people all the time on my way to the gym. Very often while stopped at traffic lights, I give money to one or more of them from my car window. Sometimes it’s a man, sometimes, it’s a woman. Someone looking from the outside might think I was propositioning him or her. Did I commit a crime?

• If I decide to interview a hooker for a article, book, or screenplay I am writing and I pull up to her on the street and offer to pay her for her time and give her some money upfront someone looking from the outside might think I was going to hire her for sex. Did I commit a crime?

• I could give any number of other misleading examples.

I’m not defending these perpetrators, but we need to question the mentality and legal theory that says flirting with someone online or going to the house of someone you are chatting with is itself a crime.

militarymuscle69 · « **Reply #19 on:** February 28, 2007, 10:45:30 AM »

Quote from: BayGBM on February 28, 2007, 10:42:11 AM

I’m still not buying it.

• I drive by homeless people all the time on my way to the gym. Very often while stopped at traffic lights, I give money to one or more of them from my car window. Sometimes it’s a man, sometimes, it’s a woman. Someone looking from the outside might think I was propositioning him or her. Did I commit a crime?

• If I decide to interview a hooker for a article, book, or screenplay I am writing and I pull up to her on the street and offer to pay her for her time and give her some money upfront someone looking from the outside might think I was going to hire her for sex. Did I commit a crime?

• I could give any number of other misleading examples.

I’m not defending these perpetrators, but we need to question the mentality and legal theory that says flirting with someone online or going to the house of someone you are chatting with is itself a crime.

It's a crime if they aren't 18

Tre · « **Reply #20 on:** February 28, 2007, 01:41:06 PM »

Quote from: militarymuscle69 on February 28, 2007, 10:45:30 AM

It's a crime if they aren't 18

That's the point. These 'decoys' are all of age. These guys being arrested and paraded around are perverts based on their online chat sessions, but there are lots of people who get into fantasy role-play with other consenting adults.

What many of these jurisdictions have basically said is that it's against the law to meet a minor - or someone you believe to be a minor - for a 'date'. Maybe that's not such a bad idea.

militarymuscle69 · « **Reply #21 on:** February 28, 2007, 01:43:39 PM »

Quote from: Tre on February 28, 2007, 01:41:06 PM

That's the point. These 'decoys' are all of age. These guys being arrested and paraded around are perverts based on their online chat sessions, but there are lots of people who get into fantasy role-play with other consenting adults.

What many of these jurisdictions have basically said is that it's against the law to meet a minor - or someone you believe to be a minor - for a 'date'. Maybe that's not such a bad idea.

I know role play is a big thing, that is why peverted justice doesn't look in role play chat rooms for perverts. Also the crime isn't talking to the teen about sex, it is the proposition. You can talk all day but the minute you say "we should meet". BOOM done, arrested. And it should be that way.

YoungBlood · « **Reply #22 on:** February 28, 2007, 03:21:38 PM »

Quote from: 240 is Back on February 22, 2007, 01:41:01 PM

NBC's motive is money. Period.

Most likely. But if you ask NBC that question, I'd bet they would say it's to expose these disturbing individuals. Then the same person that responds to the question, later shows up on the show since he/she is a freak themselves.

SinCitysmallGUY · « **Reply #23 on:** February 28, 2007, 03:40:24 PM »

Its on up here tonight and I guess they have a cop who gets busted and has a whole arsenal of Ammo and guns on him..... which i believe everyone he had with him had one chambered...

BayGBM · « **Reply #24 on:** February 28, 2007, 04:10:39 PM »

I’d like to see this predator topic covered, but in a way that is less titilating and a little more serious minded. I’ve never liked Dateline and don’t routinely watch it. Frankly, I’m surprised it’s still on the air; the show lost all credibility back in 1993.

While doing a story on General Motors pick up trucks that allegedly exploding during accidents due to poor fuel tank design, Dateline staged several accidents and when the trucks repeatedly failed to explode, the producers of the segment rigged the trucks to explode with remote control incediary devices. The rigged explosions were aired. Eventually some people were fired over the fabrication... but the damage was done.